[Speex-dev] Speex on M3 for a device for a disabled person to use

[René Schümann]

Hi Tristan,

well... if speed is really his problem (and looking at those 72 MHz it
probably is), wouldn't Speek surpass Opus by far?
I agree that Opus is way better, but it's sadly also using more resources...

But yeah,  Richard you should give Opus a try if possible ;) It's
generally easier to use then Speex and also more feature rich.

Yours sincerely,
René Schümann

*From:* Tristan Matthews <le.businessman at gmail.com>
<mailto:%3Ca%3Ele.businessman at gmail.com%3C/a%3E>
*Sent:* Thu, 9 Oct 2014 13:20:44 -0400 - *To:* Richard Sloan
<themindfactory at gmail.com> <mailto:%3Ca%3Ethemindfactory at gmail.com%3C/a%3E>
*CC:* speex-dev at xiph.org
*Subject:* Re: [Speex-dev] Speex on M3 for a device for a disabled
person to use
 
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Richard Sloan
> <themindfactory at gmail.com <mailto:themindfactory at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     I am trying to develop a device for a disabled person and need low
>     bitrate voice, speex looks good, however I need to find optimized
>     M3 code and can not, searched online all over, I use Keil also if
>     that helps.
>
>     My M3 is 128kbps/64kram 72mhz, i only need to do a encode in one
>     part and decode in another.....
>
>     Please let me know if you can help this project with a link to
>     optimized code
>
>
> For new projects, we recommend using the Opus Codec
> (http://www.opus-codec.org/) which has effectively obsoleted Speex.
>
> Best,
> Tristan
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speex-dev mailing list
> Speex-dev at xiph.org
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/speex-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20141009/c5c4f789/attachment.htm